#2 spoiler-ful thread

[Phil]

If it's just FVL expanding on an established story with controversial/sensational plotlines, then hmmm??

That was how I took it.

[eallison]

One thing that did occur to me. Did FVL interpret Byrnes original story to mean sexual abuse. There's many recorded cases of problems within Catholic institutions. It wouldn't be to much of a leap to assume that Byrne meant sexual abuse. If FVL was working from that premise, it doesn't mean I suddenly agree with that plot device being used, but I could understand better why it was. If it's just FVL expanding on an established story with controversial/sensational plotlines, then hmmm??

I can't answer FOR him, but it never came off like sexual abuse in the original story to me. It was "simple" mental torture and beating. The saddest part is, the Sisters likely meant well. That doesn't excuse what they did, not one bit, but it wasn't IMHO intended by them as evil.

I personally didn't care for the addition of sexual abuse only because, hey, Aurora already has acres of bad road to work through, and adding more is a bit troubling. Knowing it was done because Marvel didn't want to offend Catholics (again IMHO, any Catholic, of which I am a lapsed one, who would find fault with this wouldn't be reading most of Marvel or DC's output now anyway) softens things slightly. Still not crazy about it, but it won't be a deal-breaker on the book.

In thinking more about this, I think I preferred Marrina's old look. This one isn't BAD, not at all. Just not what I think of when I visualize of "my" mental picture of Marrina. Seeing her back and not simply a clone for Osborn's schemes is nice.

Take it and run,

[Legerd]

It makes sense to me that Freg went with the sexual abuse angle for just one reason: Marvel wouldn't let them use a Catholic figure (nun or priest) in this role so they had to go with a different, non-Catholic authority figure, that being a social worker. The only thing is a social worker wouldn't be involved with her punishments, in fact he wouldn't even see her very often, so he couldn't fill the role of mental/physical abuser that's needed here. The next logical idea, if they are to use this character, would be to make him a sexual abuser.

[suzene]

It makes sense to me that Freg went with the sexual abuse angle for just one reason: Marvel wouldn't let them use a Catholic figure (nun or priest) in this role so they had to go with a different, non-Catholic authority figure, that being a social worker. The only thing is a social worker wouldn't be involved with her punishments, in fact he wouldn't even see her very often, so he couldn't fill the role of mental/physical abuser that's needed here. The next logical idea, if they are to use this character, would be to make him a sexual abuser.

Except that contradicts what FVL said about the writers pulling evidence of sexual abuse from the Byrne run. So it's not there just because they couldn't use the nuns.

[DelBubs]

One thing I can't figure from all of this. FVL may or may not have read sexual abuse into Byrnes story, but Marvel would much rather that kinda controversial story than pissing off the Catholic church. What where they going to do? Stop their secret funding, send in Torquemada to discuss respect with the bullpen, a nun in every office with a ruler and a grimace? Being a devout atheist, I don't know what weight the Papacy carries nowadays. Plus the story actually negates the whole annoying 'his holiness' aspect when you read that the authoritites knew of the caretakers proclivities, but instead of reporting them just moved him onto fresher targets?

[suzene]

One thing I can't figure from all of this. FVL may or may not have read sexual abuse into Byrnes story...

Just to be clear, they did (trying to remember to give fair weight to Greg Pak here, because even if FVL is the Alpha Fan on the team, Pak's name is on there too). From my convo on FVL's Twitter:

I'd argue we just forefronted the obvious subtext of what Byrne set up, but I respect your opinion, even if we disagree.

Though, considering how many people's reaction to this has been "What? I never saw that.", I'd question how obvious that subtext is.

but Marvel would much rather that kinda controversial story than pissing off the Catholic church. What where they going to do? Stop their secret funding, send in Torquemada to discuss respect with the bullpen, a nun in every office with a ruler and a grimace? Being a devout atheist, I don't know what weight the Papacy carries nowadays. Plus the story actually negates the whole annoying 'his holiness' aspect when you read that the authoritites knew of the caretakers proclivities, but instead of reporting them just moved him onto fresher targets?

What's considered offensive/inappropriate seems to change from editorial team to editorial team and rarely makes sense to me -- remember when the exploding communion wafer/raped nun storyline from Austen's run about six years back made print, but Northstar having a boyfriend in that same run was considered too controversial? Or how one teen suicide was considered too dark for a children's title over in New Mutants 2.0, but the next creative team on the book was allowed to blow up a whole busload of students? That using an actual nun was considered too risky while still being able to use the true-life behavior widely publicized by the misdeeds of the Catholic Church (though not exclusive to them, sad to say) as shorthand for sexual abuse is just fine is similarly confounding.

But yeah, the last time anyone really made a fuss over a Marvel book that I saw, was the Tea Party folks getting offended about being portrayed accurately in Captain America. If Austen comparing religion to cancer couldn't get the EIC burned in effigy, I don't think this would have made much of a splash. As it is, I think making the sexual abuse explicit has irked more readers than the nuns would have.

[DelBubs]

It's a given now that Aurora was damaged by the caretakers actions, so where, in six more issues, can the writers go with this? Is there going to be some major developement in Aurora's character that would make the reveal even remotely palatable. I hope that this is developed now that it's out there. I would hate for it to be controversy for the sake of controversy with no further mention in the series.

[Phil]

It may well turn out that the abuse was as real as Marrina being on the cover of Vogue...

[DelBubs]

It may well turn out that the abuse was as real as Marrina being on the cover of Vogue...

Are we talking false memory, where a person recounts issues from the past that never happened. Given the actions of the UNITY party so far, it wouldn't be to much of a reach for them to use tactics like that to subvert JM?

So what issue of Vogue

[suzene]

It may well turn out that the abuse was as real as Marrina being on the cover of Vogue...

That seems unlikely. The writers obviously mean the attempt to break/turn Jeanne-Marie to be based in "real" events, otherwise, why try to bring in the nuns or invoke Byrne? And it would break with how the Unity folks have been approaching the team. All the Alphans who are being fed lies are having their heart's desire used as the chink in their armor, but those lies are grounded in actual events -- Shaman does have a strained relationship with Talisman, we can take Marrina's constantly being viewed as a monster by the people she cares for as where her fear of rejection due to her being an alien comes from, etc . Their theory with Aurora seems to be that her heart's desire is to be revenged on those who hurt her when she was young and helpless.

[Phil]

Their theory with Aurora seems to be that her heart's desire is to be revenged on those who hurt her when she was young and helpless.

Yeah, I was grasping at straws, but thought I'd put it out there just in case.

[DelBubs]

I suppose having a controlled wild carefree Aurora would with no aspect of the JM personna would be more beneficial to UNITY. Offering that aspect of her the chance for revenge...?

[Le Messor]

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

SPACE



is Tanaraq being ignored?

No, he's currently fighting Superboy.

I don't believe even a totally controlled Heather would say what she did while fighting Puck. That amount of vitriol would have to be directly implanted

I've been finding the whole run so far comes across that way, though. Marrina, Shaman... v4 feels very angry - and at times childishly so to me.

Marrina's constantly being viewed as a monster by the people she cares

Which she never was in the past, and her storyline has still failed to convince me. She was never isolated or alienated, even in her muggle hometown - Byrne went to the trouble to make that explicit.

The Other...
Suzene, sorry to disappoint you, but I agree with you. When I read it, my mind immediately leapt to the 'Rape as backstory' trope on TV tropes. Yep, it's so common, it's a trope. (Not sure if I got the name right.)

- Le Messor
"The buyer needs a hundred eyes, the seller not one."
~ George Herbert

[suzene]

Which she never was in the past, and her storyline has still failed to convince me. She was never isolated or alienated, even in her muggle hometown - Byrne went to the trouble to make that explicit.

Constantly is exaggeration for impact on my part, admittedly. The two incidents that came to mind were Heather's debating whether or not to tell AF to kill Marrina during the Mantlo run, and Namor ripping her head off more recently, though the "Is there a person in there, or just a monster waiting for a mating call" question has to create a lot of internal conflict and self-doubt anyway. Devil's advocacy aside, before this issue, Marrina's characterization was the weakest part of the new book and remains in my top three gripes about the relaunch. This new characterization just doesn't work for me, getting it in medias res as we have. It's still too hard a change in direction with too thin an explanation, and with eight other teammates plus cameos all jostling for their fair share of page time, there's been no room so far to expand on the reasons for the new attitude. I guess we're seeing why Byrne's unconventional approach to the team way back when worked so well...focusing on their lives apart from Alpha Flight allowed for characterization without overcrowding in terms of number of characters, or characterization at expense of action and vice versa.

Suzene, sorry to disappoint you, but I agree with you. When I read it, my mind immediately leapt to the 'Rape as backstory' trope on TV tropes. Yep, it's so common, it's a trope. (Not sure if I got the name right.)

Now I am confused. I would be disappointed why?

[Le Messor]

Now I am confused. I would be disappointed why?

You and me agreeing on something?
I'm expecting news of the imminent collapse of the universe any minute now...

Unless they went looking for this evidence after they were told not to use the nuns, and had to come up with a different angle to be able to tell their story. Look, I agree with you that it is a tired trope, but since Freg wrote the story to involve Aurora's MPD, and her mental illness was caused by her abuse at the nuns hands, what are the writers supposed to put in place of the nuns when editorial said they couldn't use them? It's not a great solution, but what else are they to put in?

Any kind of abuse but sexual, as Suzene has outlined? - more to the point, physical / mental abuse.
Adding that specific type is just an extra curveball that's not necessary for her origin.

Not that I'm looking to defend Marvel's actions, 'cause I don't agree with them, but I'm assuming they were more worried with Catholic readers, or their parents who might complain because of that kind of imagery.

That part I'm glad about. I've often got the impression that Marvel has the opposite mandate - "You must put this in or our Catholic / Christian readers won't get offended!"
OTOH, with Aurora, the damage is done. We know she's got Catholic abuse, putting it here would be nothing new - they should've let this one slide; it's already there.

I think that last sentence is a case of me abusing the English language...

- Le Messor
"To be great is to be misunderstood."
~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
"To generalize is to be an idiot."
~ William Blake